Re: tetex-base: /usr/share/doc/texmf/mkhtml{,.nawk}
"CMC" == C.M. Connelly <cmc@debian.org>
"JG" == Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmul.ac.uk>
"SP" == Sean ``Shaleh'' Perry <shalehperry@attbi.com>
CMC> There are two scripts in /usr/share/doc/texmf/ for
CMC> rebuilding the teTeX documentation. One is called
CMC> mkhtml, the other mkhtml.nawk. [...]
CMC> I realize that moving the scripts elsewhere would be
CMC> preferable, but doing so would require them to be
CMC> rewritten, which isn't as high a priority as getting
CMC> woody out the door.
JG> I'm not totally sure why we would have to move them: they
JG> are private scripts which affect only files in
JG> /usr/share/doc/texmf and its subdirectories. As long as
JG> the programs which call these scripts are robust if
JG> /usr/share/doc/texmf (or even /usr/share/doc) does not
JG> exist, where is the problem?
Sean Perry seems to believe there's a Policy violation here:
SP> As for the above scripts, they are find as long as they
SP> lack +x perms. Rather than override the lintian message I
SP> would recommend actually following policy and fixing the
SP> package.
I can't find a specific statement in the Policy Manual that says
you cannot have executables in /usr/share/doc, although it does
seem like a sensible thing.
In any case, we're back to the status quo, in which the scripts
are not marked as executable, will not run without being changed,
and will not run when called by texconfig.
CMC
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Man cannot be civilised, or be kept civilised by what he does in his
spare time; only by what he does as his work.
W.R. Lethaby
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
C.M. Connelly cmc@debian.org SHC, DS
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-tetex-maint-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: